<p>Thank you, Achil. Very well said.</p>
<p>Achii, I think I love you. </p>
<p>UChicago guy here. Your school takes a ridiculous amount of undeserved heat on these college addmission forums. It's pretty bizarre.</p>
<p>I want to have your babies, Achil.</p>
<p><a href="http://news-info.wustl.edu/rankings/%5B/url%5D">http://news-info.wustl.edu/rankings/</a></p>
<p>That is not the profile of a school that is ranked higher than Berkeley, Chicago and Cornell, among others.</p>
<p>Cavalier, you must be really bored or something, because according to the board you've been spending like a day just trying to find ways to trashtalk Washington University...</p>
<p>True, I do get bored during the day (we had three customers all day where I work), but how have I been trashtalking WUStl? Did you even read the OP? Geez, I'm trying to give an outside opinion of your school and I think I've done a fairly good job of not being too negative. Washington University is an excellent school, certainly deserving of a top 25 ranking and a great deal of respect, but you have to understand that people not affiliated with the university don't see it as an 11th ranked school. For what it's worth, a lot of people get agitated over Duke and Penn being ranked equal to or higher than MIT, Stanford and Caltech.</p>
<p>You've been incredibly condescending, actually.</p>
<p>I recognize there's a need for criticism and unbiased review of WashU (considering the majority of the people on the board probably will be majorly biased), but you're making an argument purely based on numbers and rankings. And that's ironic, because the very thing you're railing against is WashU's supposedly incorrect U.S. News ranking.</p>
<p>Prospective students do need to hear from people outside the university...but you might not be the one.</p>
<p>My point all along has merely been that WUStl should not be ranked 11th and should not be ranked ahead of several schools such as Berkeley, Cornell and Chicago. I realize that any dissenting views of a school on its own forum are viewed as an affront to all that the school stands for, but, frankly, the oversensitivity of the posters on this forum has surprised me.</p>
<p>Did you even read what I wrote?</p>
<p>Yes. What do you want me to say? Heil WUStl? I'm still struggling to see what kind of point you're trying to make, other than that I'm wrong and WUStl is, indeed, a better school than Berkeley.</p>
<p>I think the point was that you're so against the numbers and rankings, yet....you're arguing against Wash U within the frame of rankings.</p>
<p>Did I say I was against numbers or rankings?</p>
<p>Here's my reworded version:</p>
<p>You're arguing against Wash U's rankings, by citing other rankings.</p>
<p>You're arguing against the system that ranked Wash U #11, by citing other rankings from the very same system, and saying: "That is not the profile of a school that is ranked higher than Berkeley, Chicago and Cornell, among others."</p>
<p>Different methodologies are used for the other rankings. But I digress. The point of my posting that link was to give you an idea of how many of WUStl's graduate programs are regarded. Outside of the medical school, few have the sheer might of Berkeley or Chicago's departments. That, of course, contributes to academic strength which, in turn, contributes to ranking. I suppose you're incapable of seeing your school as anything <em>but</em> #11.</p>
<p>It's nice that this devolved into a flame war. </p>
<p>It would be even nicer if you, cavalier, didn't respond by acting like your "enemies" are obsessively in love with WashU and refuse to admit any fault in the school. Your username is apt.</p>
<p>This, I think, is a case study in the negative attitude towards WashU. People hate to see it ranked in front of schools that are supposedly more prestigious or supposedly possess "sheer [academic] might." </p>
<p>Again: don't bash WashU, bash the rankings.</p>
<p>Actually, go ahead and criticize the school, but don't use obscure ranking numerology. What you've been spouting hasn't been fair criticism.</p>
<p>That's why I would attend Berkeley or Chicago for grad school. Personally, I feel that incredible grad programs (especially at schools as large as Berkeley, Michigan, etc.) only enrich the undergrad experience at a certain level: amazing grad programs (and grad students) will nearly always get preference in the media, in terms of grants or funding, etc. One of my favorite things about WUSTL is that undergraduates (especially in the humanities) get an early grad-style experience because they're not overshadowed by their older and supposedly more advanced peers. This is one of the many reasons some people prefer a liberal arts college (not necessarily referring to the liberal arts education, but instead to the lack of affiliation with grad programs). Look at schools like Amherst, or Swarthmore, or Williams, for great examples. Top LACs, certainly, but your logic (and, for that matter, the logic of US News) would never put them on par with, say, Stanford or Chicago. However, these LACs are some of the top feeders for prestigious grad programs, particularly within the Ivies.</p>
<p>In conclusion, it's rather ridiculous to say that I'm not getting the best education for my situation or my personality or my interests. College is whatever I make of it, and my undergrad experience at WashU isn't going to be an 11, or even a 21, or really any ranked or calculated number, because I'm not ordering my degree off a value menu. I know I'll be happy at WashU, but I've gotta say that all of this focus on undermining WashU's ranking or statistics (or even abilitly to manipulate statistics--more power to them) is, in part, an attack on my taste and my priorities. I know it's not, but I just think the entire discussion is rather superfluous.</p>
<p>Go Bears.</p>
<p>"Different methodologies are used for the other rankings."</p>
<p>Clearly, that makes them more correct. And I'm sure you've studied those methodologies, so you understand why they are better.</p>
<p>(You should have noted in your post then to disregard the US News rankings.)</p>
<p>I think the funniest thing about this entire discussion is that I chose WashU in order to avoid the Ivy hype and that ever-present need to assert one's superiority (at both the individual and the institutional level). Then again, we at WashU are more defensive than assertive, or so far as I can tell.</p>
<p>Defensive sounds right. Assertive not so much. It's not like I can tell someone I go to "Washington University" and expect them to be wowed. Most don't know where it is. :-)</p>
<p>But just because it isn't a household name, I don't want people to discount it.</p>
<p>I'm with you.</p>